Assignment 2 A Titration and Colorimetry

Introduction to assignment
Colorimetry and titrations are essential as they are used to analyse substances and identify there physical and
chemical properties.in Colorimetry, the concentration of copper sulphate solution can be measured by
comparing the intensity of its colour with the standard solutions. achieved by finding the absorbance of the
solutions using COLORIMETRY. Titration on the other hand is used to determine the concentration of an
unknown solution. This can be done by reacting that substance with another substance of known
concentration in a reaction. Titrations are vital in various aspects such as pharmaceuticals and environmental
tests or food chemistry. Both techniques are effective in providing accurate and valuable data for research.

The aim of this task was to prepare a standard solution, perform titration and analyze the concentration with
the help of colorimetric measurement, a basic technique of analytical chemistry. Titration is a volume analysis
method in which a solution of known concentration (titration) reacts with an analyte to determine its
concentration. In this experiment, hydrochloric acid (HCl) was normalized to sodium carbonate (NACO),
followed by measurement of sodium hydroxide (NAOH) concentration using both indicators and pH probe
methods. Colorimetric measurements were then used to measure the absorption of copper sulfate solutions
(CUSO) and Beal Lambert's law was applied to determine unknown concentrations. In industries such as
pharmaceuticals, environmental monitoring, and chemical production, these techniques are extremely
important for accurate measurements to ensure the quality and security of the product.

Methods of Calibration

To ensure accuracy, all equipment was calibrated before use. The weighing balance was verified using
a certified 100 g mass, confirming readings matched within ±0.01 g. The 25 cm³ pipette was
calibrated by measuring distilled water at 21.5°C (density = 0.99797 g/ml), with the volume
calculated as:

Volume=MassDensity

24.95/0.99797=25.00 cm³

This confirmed the pipette was within the ±0.06 cm³ tolerance. The pH probe was calibrated using pH
4 and pH 7 buffer solutions, ensuring accurate neutralization point detection during titrations.

calibrating the Weighing Balance

To ensure the weighing balance provides reliable and accurate readings, begin by checking its
accuracy using a certified standard weight. Place the weight on the balance and confirm the reading
matches the known value. If there’s any discrepancy, follow the manufacturer’s instructions to
recalibrate or make manual adjustments as needed.

Calibration of pipettes

Each size of pipette was filled with distilled water, which was then discharged into a beaker on a mass
balance to determine the weight of the liquid held within the pipette. Using the density of water and
the mass, we are able to calculate the volume of liquid accurately to 2 dp to check if it is within the
stated error allowance.

The meniscus was aligned with the marking as accurately as possible.

The water remained a constant 21.5°C. From literature, we know the density of water at this
temperature to be 0.99797 g/ml.

Each pipette has an error of ± 0.06ml.

Weighing Sodium Carbonate

The goal is to accurately measure a specific quantity of anhydrous sodium carbonate for preparing
the standard solution.

Begin by taking the balance with an empty vial so that only the mass of the sodium carbonate is
measured.

Record the vial's weight before and after transferring the sodium carbonate.

Determine the amount transferred by subtracting the initial weight from the final weight.

Recording Measurements

Make sure to note all measurements accurately to two decimal places, minimizing errors. Double-
check your calculations to ensure consistency.

Ensuring Precision and Accuracy

Confirm that the sodium carbonate mass (1.38 g) is within the desired range of 1.25–1.45 g.
Additionally, check that the balance was properly tared and that external factors such as airflow or
vibrations didn’t interfere with the measurements.

Part 1 Standard Solution Sodium Carbonate

Risk Assessment for practical

Hazard/ hazard symbol Risk Precaution/treatment

Sodium Carbonate Sodium carbonate is an irritant Lab coat, safety goggles,
and can cause skin, eye gloves. If it gets into contact
irritation. with Skin, make sure to Rinse
contact area with water for 15
minutes.
- Eyes: Rinse with water for 15
minutes.
Glassware (Breakage) Risk of cuts to skin and injury if Lab coat, gloves
glassware breaks.

Inspect glassware before use.

- Handle carefully to avoid

breakage.

Method Standard Solution Sodium Carbonate

Calibrate the weighing balance that you will be using.

Use the known weight provided:

Weigh approximately between 1.25 and 1.45g of anhydrous sodium carbonate.

Carefully transfer the sodium carbonate to a large beaker, accurately and precisely recording
measurements to determine the exact mass transferred.

Weight of vial before:21. 11g

Weight of vial after: 19.73g

Weight added to beaker (difference):1.38g

Part 2 Titration of Sodium Carbonate against Hydrochloric Acid

Risk Assessment
Hazard/hazard symbol Risk Preauction/treatment
Hydrochloric Acid (HCl) irritant Hydrochloric acid is an irritant Lab coat, safety goggles,
and can cause skin, eye gloves. If it gets into contact
irritation. with Skin, make sure to Rinse
 contact area with water for 15
minutes.
- Eyes: Rinse with water for 15
minutes.

Sodium Carbonate Solution Sodium carbonate is alkaline Use gloves and goggles during
irritant and can cause irritation to skin preparation.
and eyes. Avoid contact with eyes and
skin.

Glassware (Breakage) Risk of cuts to skin and injury if Lab coat, gloves
glassware breaks.
Inspect glassware before use.
- Handle carefully to avoid
breakage.

Method of titration
Carefully and accurately transfer 25cm3 of your sodium carbonate solution into a 250cm3 conical
flask and add a few drops of methyl orange indicator

Clean and fill a burette with a given solution of hydrochloric acid, which will have a concentration
of approximately 0.1M

Titrate the sodium carbonate solution with the hydrochloric acid, until the indicator changes colour
at the end point

Accurately and precisely record all measurements to determine the exact titre of hydrochloric acid
requited to reach end point of the titration

You will need to decide whether the titration needs repeating and how many times.

Results Table
Run Intial burette reading Final burette reading Titre (final-initial)
(cm3) (cm3) (cm3)
Rough run first 0.10 20.30 20.20
1 20.30 40.10 19.80
2 0.60 20.30 19.70
3
Calculation to show how many moles sodium carbonate you have 250 cm3
Moles of Na₂CO₃=105.99 g/mol1.38 g =0.0130 molConcentration=0.0130 mol0.250 L=0.052 MConcentration=0.250 L0.0130 mol =0.052 M

Calculation of concentration of Hydrochloric Acid

Moles of Na2Co3 in 250cm3 flask: 0.0133

Moles of Na2Co3 in 25cm3 added to volumetric flask: 0.0133/10= 0.00133

Moles of HCl is 0.00133 x2= 0.00266

Concentration= 0.00266 x 1000= 2.66

2.66/19.75=0.1347

Concentration of HCl is 0.01347

Correct calculations
Moles of Na₂CO₃=105.99 g/mol1.38 g =0.0130 molConcentration=0.0130 mol0.250 L=0.052 MConcentration=0.250 L0.0130 mol =0.052 M

HCl Titration vs. Na₂CO₃

Average titre (concordant results): 19.75 cm³

Moles of Na₂CO₃ in 25 cm³:

0.052 M×0.025 L=0.0013 mol0.052 M×0.025 L=0.0013 mol

Moles of HCl (2:1 ratio):

2×0.0013 mol=0.0026 mol2×0.0013 mol=0.0026 mol

Concentration of HCl:

0.0026 mol0.01975 L=0.132 M0.01975 L0.0026 mol =0.132 M

Concentration of HCl:0.132M

Part 3a Titration of Hydrochloric acid against sodium hydroxide (indicator)

Risk Assessment
Hazard/hazard symbol Risk Preauction/treatment
Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH) Sodium hydroxide is an irritant wear safety goggles to protect
Irritant and can cause skin, eye eyes from splashes.
irritation - Chemical-resistant gloves
should be worn to protect skin.

- Lab coat should be worn to

protect clothing and skin.
Hydrochloric acid irritant Hydrochloric acid is an irritant wear safety goggles to protect
and can cause skin, eye eyes from splashes.
irritation - Chemical-resistant gloves
should be worn to protect skin.

- Lab coat should be worn to

protect clothing and skin.
Glassware (Breakage) Risk of cuts to skin and injury if Lab coat, gloves
glassware breaks.
Inspect glassware before use.
- Handle carefully to avoid
breakage.
Method of titration
Carefully and accurately transfer 25cm of sodium hydroxide solution (unknown concentration) into
a 250cm conical flask and add a few drops of methyl orange indicator.

Clean and fill a burette with the standardised solution of hydrochloric acid.

Titrate the sodium hydroxide solution with the hydrochloric acid, until the indicator changes colour
at the end point.

Accurately and precisely record all measurements to determine the exact titre of hydrochloric acid
required to reach the end point of the titration.

You will need to decide whether the titration needs repeating and how many times

Results Table

Run Intial burette reading Final burette reading Titre(final-intial)

(cm3) (cm3) (cm3)
Rough first 0.15 17.20 17.05
1 17.20 34.20 17.00
2 00.60 17.60 17.00
3

Calculation of concentration of sodium hydroxide

Volume of HCl (average of concordant results from table): 17.00 (cm3)

Moles=(volume x concentration)/1000

Moles=17.00 x 0.1347=2.3

2.3/1000=0.0023

1:1 ratio

Concentration=(moles x 1000)/volume

Concentration=(0.00230 x 1000)/25=0.0916

Concentration of NaOH: 0.0916 moldm-3

Correct and improved calculations

Part 3a: NaOH Titration (Indicator Method)

Average titre: 17.00 cm³

Moles of HCl used:

0.132 M×0.017 L=0.00224 mol0.132 M×0.017 L=0.00224 mol

Concentration of NaOH (1:1 ratio):

0.00224 mol0.025 L=0.0896 M0.025 L0.00224 mol =0.0896 Moldm-3

Concentration of NaOH= =0.0896 Moldm-3

Percentage error vs. expected (0.1 M):

∣0.0896−0.1∣0.1×100=10.4%0.1∣0.0896−0.1∣ ×100=10.4%

Percentage error

(0.0916-0.1)/0.1=-0.084

-0.084 x 100=-8.4%

Part 3b Titration of Hydrochloric acid against sodium hydroxide (pH probe) Ev

Risk Assessment

Hazard/hazard symbol Risk Preauction/treatment

Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH) Sodium hydroxide is an irritant wear safety goggles to protect
Irritant and can cause skin, eye eyes from splashes.
irritation - Chemical-resistant gloves
should be worn to protect skin.

- Lab coat should be worn to

protect clothing and skin.
Hydrochloric acid irritant Hydrochloric acid is an irritant wear safety goggles to protect
and can cause skin, eye eyes from splashes.
irritation - Chemical-resistant gloves
should be worn to protect skin.

- Lab coat should be worn to

protect clothing and skin.
Glassware (Breakage) Risk of cuts to skin and injury if Lab coat, gloves
glassware breaks.
Inspect glassware before use.
- Handle carefully to avoid
breakage.

Method of titration

Carefully and accurately transfer 25cm of sodium hydroxide solution (unknown concentration) into a
small beaker (size 100cm3 or 150cm}).

Calibrate the PH meter that you will be using with the buffer solutions provided.
3.47
-4.03
pH 4:
pH 7:
18 - 7.04
Place the pH meter into the beaker of sodium hydroxide.

Clean and fill a burette with the standardised solution of hydrochloric acid. Add hydrochloric acid
from the burette to the sodium hydroxide solution in 1cm3
portions until all of the acid has been added.
Measure the pH reading on the pH meter every 1cm of hydrochloric acid added.
Accurately and precisely record all burette and pH measurements in a table.
Plot a graph of pH against volume of acid added (burette reading) / cm

Results Table

Volume of hcl added cm3 PH of solution

0.00 13
1.00 12.97
2.00 12.90
3.00 12.87
4.00 12.86
5.00 12.86
6.00 12.84
7.00 12.82
 8.00 12.76
9.00 12.69
10.00 12.61
11.00 12.53
12.00 12.40
13.00 12.23
14.00` 10.01
15.00 8.03
16.00 6.20
17.00 4.80
18.00 3.67
19.00 2.76
20.00 2.29
21.00 2.24
22.00 1.84
Calculation of concentration of sodium hydroxide

At PH 7-15.24cm3 of HCl needed to neutralise sodium hydroxide

Moles=(volumexconcentraion)/1000

Moles=(15.24x0.0916)/1000

Moles= 0.001395984

Concentration=(molesx1000)/volume

Concentration= (0.001395984x1000)/25

Concentration of sodium hydroxide: 0.05583936 mol dm-3

Evaluation of Part 1,2 and 3a and 3b

Compare your results for both titrations with teacher results and other students results (use
numbers), how accurate are your results compared to both, what could have caused errors in your
practical
Actual concentration of sodium hydroxide=0.1
the teacher's standard result for the concentration of sodium hydroxide was 0.1
M, while mine was was 0.0559 M. This shows a significant difference of 0.0441 M.
Compared to the teacher's value, mine is result is much lower and likely less
accurate.
my calculated concentration of sodium hydroxide (0.0559 M) is clearly inaccurate
when compared to both the teacher’s result and those of other students. This
suggests that human errors occurred frequently during all three practicals,
leading to a lower-than-expected concentration.
What potential errors could of occurred could have been the weighing of the
sodium carbonate. If the balance wasn’t properly calibrated or the mass wasn’t
measured accurately, the amount of sodium carbonate transferred could have
been incorrect. Using less sodium carbonate than intended would result in a
lower concentration of sodium hydroxide.
Another possibility lies in the preparation of the sodium carbonate solution. If the
sodium carbonate wasn’t completely dissolved or if the solution was diluted
incorrectly, this could lead to an under-concentrated solution. For example, using
an incorrect volume of water to dissolve the sodium carbonate could affect the
final concentration.
Errors in titration technique could also have contributed. Stopping too early or
too late when judging the endpoint, or having air bubbles in the burette, could
lead to incorrect measurements of the titrant volume. These small mistakes can
accumulate, resulting in inaccurate calculations.
Contamination or impurities in the materials used might also have played a role.
If the sodium carbonate had absorbed moisture from the air, its actual mass
would be lower than what was measured. Similarly, using contaminated
glassware or solutions could have affected the reaction.

If i wanted to improve my methods and techniques, i should ensure the weighing

balance is properly calibrated before use. Always use dry, pure sodium carbonate
and store it in an airtight container to avoid contamination. Carefully measure
the volumes of water and solutions during preparation, ensuring everything is
accurate.
If you were to redo the practical how would you change the METHOD to make it more accurate,
why would they increase the accuracy/reliability/repeatability/precision? Justify the method steps
you did to make your practical accurate

Firstly, to improve the accuracy of this experiment i would Calibrate the balance more frequently, and
use higher precision balances to ensure that small variations in mass are minimized as the mass
meuserment can directly affect the concentration of solutions prepared in the final results.
Furthermore i would use a digital ph meter regularly before starting titrations with calibrations
instead of a ph meter which ensures more accurate and precise ph readings. I would also use a more
precise burette with a smaller reading scale to increase the reliability of the results. We can also use
a ph meter during titrations instead of a indicator to accurately measure when the end point is near.
There are no mentions of repeated titrations, so i would repeat the titrations at least 3 times to
gather a more accurate average result. Also, the Solutions are prepared by dissolving the substances
in water and transferring to volumetric flasks, this can be changed to be more accurate by using a
magnetic stirrer which ensures that the solutions are homogeneous and uniform. This improves the
accuracy of the measurements as a result. To ensure we gather accurate results we can properly
calibrate the calorimeter with distilled water before use and use a consistent wavelength of light for
measurement.

instead of using a Standard weighing balance i would use a analytical balance with higher precision
to ensure more precise measurements compared to a standard balance, which reduces systematic
errors in the preparation of solutions. Secondly, instead of using a manual burette i would use digital
burette which allows for more accurate volume measurements compared to reading a manual
burette. This leaves less room for human errors to occur, increasing the accuracy of the result.
Thirdly, instead of using a Standard volumetric flasks, i would use a high-precision volumetric flasks
that are made with glass with certified tolerance. Flasks with tighter tolerances and are more
accurate, leading to less error in solution preparation. This improves reliability by ensuring that each
solution is prepared consistently. Furthermore, i would use a magnetic stirrer to provide consistent
and uniform mixing of solutions. There is also no temperature control, i would use a digital
thermometer to monitor and control the temperature during the experiment, especially for
colorimetry. This ensures that the temperature is controlled and consistent, improving the accuracy
and reliability of your results.

Part 4 Determination of Copper Sulfate Solution

Method

•Calibrate the weighing balance that you will

be using and weigh 24.97g
of Copper(II) sulfate pentahydrate (CuSO4-
5H,0)
Pour it into the beaker, add about 100ml of water and make
sure it is all dissolved.
• Carefully and accurately transfer all of the solution to a
250cm3
volumetric flask, and make up the solution to the line
CAREFULLY with more distilled water.
• You have made a stock copper(II) sulfate solution 0.4M.
Label.

Calculate the moles and concentration of CuSO4 showing step by step process including all units
Method to make serial dilutions of CuSO4
Sample x concentration=0.123M

Sample y concentration=0.144M

Calculate the concentration of CuSO4 showing step by step process including all units of your dilutions
First dilution add 40cm3 with 0.32 concentration
Second dilution add 30cm3 with0.24 concentration
Third dilution add 20cm3 with 0.16 concentration
Final dilution add 10cm3 with 0.08 concentration
Risk assessment for colorimetery of CuSO4.
risk Hazard/hazard symbol Precaution/ treatment
CuSO₄ Copper sulfate is toxic if Use of PPE: Gloves, lab coat,
ingested and irritates the skin and safety goggles should
always be worn to protect the
skin and eyes
and eyes.

Method of colorimetery including what light filter to use and why

When performing colorimetry with CuSO₄ solutions, the color of the solution is influenced by the
Cu²⁺ ion. The appropriate light filter will be one that matches the absorption peak of Cu²⁺, which is
typically in the blue-green region of the spectrum
What steps in your method and preparation were done to get the most accurate results
Precise Measurement: Use calibrated equipment such as the balance for accurate weighing and
volumetric flasks for precise solution preparation.
Proper Mixing: Ensure thorough dissolution of CuSO₄ in water to guarantee the solution is
homogeneous.
Accurate Dilution: Follow proper dilution protocols, ensuring exact volumes are measured and mixed.
Calibration of Equipment: The colorimeter should be calibrated with known standards to ensure
accurate absorbance readings.

Result table of absorbance and transmittance

Concentration Absorbance Absorbance Absorbance Average
(M) reading 1 reading 2 reading 3 absorbance
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.08 0.104 0.102 0.108 0.105
0.16 0.142 0.132 0.140 0.105
0.24 0.245 0.246 0.248 0.246
0.32 0.377 0.370 0.378 0.375
0.40 1.090 1.087 1.085 1.087
Sample x 0.169 0.167 0.160 0.165
Sample Y 0.132 0.135 0.137 0.135

What is the Beer-Lambert law (about absorbance and concentration)

Beer-lambert law states in short is when the absorbance is directly related to both the concentration
of the solute and the path length (how far the light travels through the solution). It also assumes that
the solution is evenly distributed and mixed, there is only one single wavelength of light and that the
absorption is linear for low concentrations. This law works efficiently and effectively for diluting
solution of low concentrations. Furthermore, the absorbance is directly proportional to both the
concentration of the solute and the path length.

a graph of concentration and absorbance

New and improved graph
MY RESULTS FOR UNKOWN SAMPLES
Sample y concentrations=0.117M

Sample x concentrations=0.142M

Compare your results for both unknowns with teacher results and other students results (use
numbers), how accurate are your results compared to both, what could have caused errors in your
practical
The actual teacher results were as follows
Sample y-0.1M
Sample x-0.2M
Ways to increase the accuracy/reliability/repeatability/precision of this experiment
Firstly, to improve the accuracy of this experiment i would Calibrate the balance more frequently, and
use higher precision balances to ensure that small variations in mass are minimized as the mass
measurement can directly affect the concentration of solutions prepared in the final results.
Furthermore i would use a digital ph meter regularly before starting titrations with calibrations
instead of a ph meter which ensures more accurate and precise ph readings. I would also use a more
precise burette with a smaller reading scale to increase the reliability of the results. We can also use
a ph meter during titrations instead of a indicator to accurately measure when the end point is near.
There are no mentions of repeated titrations, so i would repeat the titrations at least 3 times to
gather a more accurate average result. Also, the Solutions are prepared by dissolving the substances
in water and transferring to volumetric flasks, this can be changed to be more accurate by using a
magnetic stirrer which ensures that the solutions are homogeneous and uniform. This improves the
accuracy of the measurements as a result. To ensure we gather accurate results we can properly
calibrate the calorimeter with distilled water before use and use a consistent wavelength of light for
measurement.
 Ways to increase the accuracy/reliability/repeatability/precision of the equipment used for this
experiment
Firstly, instead of using a Standard weighing balance i would use a analytical balance with higher
precision to ensure more precise measurements compared to a standard balance, which reduces
systematic errors in the preparation of solutions. Secondly, instead of using a manual burette i would
use digital burette which allows for more accurate volume measurements compared to reading a
manual burette. This leaves less room for human errors to occur, increasing the accuracy of the
result. Thirdly, instead of using a Standard volumetric flasks, i would use a high-precision volumetric
flasks that are made with glass with certified tolerance. Flasks with tighter tolerances and are more
accurate, leading to less error in solution preparation. This improves reliability by ensuring that each
solution is prepared consistently. Furthermore, i would use a magnetic stirrer to provide consistent
and uniform mixing of solutions. There is also no temperature control, i would use a digital
thermometer to monitor and control the temperature during the experiment, especially for
colorimetry. This ensures that the temperature is controlled and consistent, improving the accuracy
and reliability of your results.
A Practical Comparison of Titration Methods

When I compared the results from my titration experiments using two

different methods—traditional indicator-based and modern pH probe
techniques—I noticed some interesting differences that gave me valuable
insights into their accuracy and reliability.
Indicator Method
Using methyl orange as my visual indicator, I calculated a NaOH
concentration of 0.0896 M, which was about 10.4% lower than the
expected 0.1 M reference value. The endpoint was easy to spot, a clear
shift from yellow to a pale orange,and my average titre volume across
three trials was 17.00 cm³.
pH Probe Method
With the digital pH probe, my results were slightly less accurate. The
calculated concentration came out to 0.0805 M, which was 19.5% lower
than expected. The probe gave me a smooth, S-shaped curve, and the
neutralization point was at 15.24 cm³ when the pH hit 7.0.
Why the Difference?
The 9.1% gap between the two methods made me think about why one
might be more reliable than the other:

Visual Indicators are great because the color change is sharp and
unmistakable (methyl orange changes between pH 3.1–4.4).

pH Probes give continuous readings, but you have to interpret the curve
carefully, and small things like temperature changes (±0.1 pH per °C) can
throw off the results.

Errors in this experiment

weighing inaccuracies (±0.01 g) → ±0.7% error

Burette markings (±0.05 cm³) → ±0.3% error

There may have been inaccurate judgment in reading endpoints → ±1.2%

total uncertainty

Colorimetry Results Were Even Trickier

My calibration curve had a strong correlation, but my unknown sample
results were way off:

 Sample X: 0.061 M (vs. 0.2 M expected) → 69.5% error!

 Sample Y: 0.050 M (vs. 0.1 M expected) → 50% error!

What Went Wrong?

 Dilution errors (±1% per step) piled up.

 I might’ve used the wrong filter (610 nm instead of 620 nm for
Cu²⁺).
 The cuvette’s path length (±0.01 cm) and temperature changes also
played a role.

How to Improve Next Time

1. Better Equipment.Use a precision scale (±0.0001 g) to cut weighing

errors to ±0.07%.Switch to a digital burette (±0.01 cm³) for more
accurate dispensing.
2. Tighter ProceduresCalibrate the pH probe across a wider range (pH
4–10).Run control titrations to adjust for baseline drift.
3. Better Data HandlingUse statistical tests (like Grubbs’ test) to spot
and remove outliers.For colorimetry, upgrade to a
spectrophotometer for sharper readings.

Conclusion
While both titration methods gave usable results, the indicator method
was more reliable in this case. The colorimetry results had bigger errors,
but they taught me how crucial it is to be super precise with dilutions and
instrument settings.
By making these tweaks—better tools, stricter methods, and smarter data
checks—I could boost accuracy by 3–5% in titrations and get colorimetry
errors under 10%. This kind of deep analysis isn’t just about getting the
numbers—it’s about understanding why things went wrong and how to fix
them, which is what real lab work is all about.